MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097856160 · doi:10.1177/1070496504268345

The Contribution of Social Capital to Household Welfare in a Paper-Recycling Craft Village in Vietnam

2004· article· en· W2097856160 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Environment & Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Capital and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsSocial capitalHousehold incomeCapital intensityWelfarePhysical capitalLabour economicsCapital (architecture)Production (economics)Demographic economicsSocial statusSocial mobilityHuman capitalEconomic growthMicroeconomicsGeographyMarket economySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined whether the contribution of social capital to household economic outputs was greater than that of other types of capital, whether different dimensions of social capital contribute equally to household income, and whether the role of social capital varies among different categories of households. We developed a reduced-form model of the household production function, in which social capital is treated as a production factor similar to other conventional factors such as physical capital, labor, and human capital, with household income and expenditure as dependent variables. The results show that social capital has a strong and positive contribution to household income, and the positive contribution of social capital to the general (the poor) house-hold’s income is greater than that of the paper-recycling (the rich) household’s income. In contrast to other studies, the number of memberships in associations does not have an impact on household income.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it